Thoughts from the interface of science, religion, law and culture

After spending several years touring the country as a stand up comedian, Ed Brayton tired of explaining his jokes to small groups of dazed illiterates and turned to writing as the most common outlet for the voices in his head. He has appeared on the Rachel Maddow Show and the Thom Hartmann Show, and is almost certain that he is the only person ever to make fun of Chuck Norris on C-SPAN.

Science blogs

EVENTS

Warren Mayor Compares Atheists to Nazis, KKK

Jim Fouts, the mayor of Warren, Michigan, which is currently being sued because he refuses to allow a reason station along with a Christian prayer station at city hall, responded to that lawsuit by comparing atheists to Nazis and the KKK.

“Once the government opens public space for use by private groups, it cannot pick and choose who can use the space based on the content of their message or whether public officials agree with that message,” said Dan Korobkin, ACLU of Michigan deputy legal director, adding “The city cannot allow speech supportive of religion and reject speech supportive of atheism.”

Fouts told The Associated Press on Wednesday that Marshall’s “reason station” would be diametrically opposed to prayer.

“The city has certain values that I don’t believe are in general agreement with having an atheist station, nor in general agreement with having a Nazi station or Ku Klux Klan station,” Fouts said. “I cannot accept or will not allow a group that is disparaging of another group to have a station here.”…

The city doesn’t endorse the “prayer station,” but has allowed religious groups to set up tables in the atrium for several years, according to Fouts.

“They don’t walk up to people,” Fouts said. “They are just there if someone wishes to seek solace or guidance from them. The atheist station does not serve that purpose. It will not contribute to community values or helping an individual out.”

I’m glad he recognizes that prayer is diametrically opposed to reason, but having a reason station is not disparaging of a prayer station. If someone has problems they want to talk about, one group offers to pray for them and the other offers to help you think through them logically. I bet the second one works better. Fouts, as always, is using ad hoc rationalizations for the outcome he wants.

And even if it was, the atheists still have the constitutional right. There is nothing in the constitution that illegalizes speech that disparages prayer (or anything else, unless you count treason, which is a trifle beyond disparaging!). We don’t need to justify our speech by pointing out that it doesn’t insult theists; we need to justify our speech by pointing out that we have the same right to speak.

Well, that’s just fine, because their prayer station is diametrically opposed to my reason, and their Christianity is an affront to my morals. Does that mean the prayer station has to go now?
/serious snark

“I cannot accept or will not allow a group that is disparaging of another group to have a station here.”…

I’ve noticed something interesting. Many spiritual and religious people seem to operate under the blithe assumption that they’re not “disparaging” any group or individual … as long as they’re not specifically spelling out what they’re really saying. Implications are socially invisible when it comes to religion.

“Only Jesus saves” is not disparaging anyone. It’s positive, happy, unimpeachable. No insult in that. “All Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, pagans, atheists are going to be damned to hell,” however, is too explicit. You can say the first sentence and anyone who hears and addresses the underlying message in the second one is just looking for a fight. They’re inserting a negative meaning which simply isn’t there.

Hell-believing Christians remain in deep denial regarding the moral implications of a god who promises unimaginable suffering for all eternity to humans. So, “Jesus saves”, from what exactly? Who is this infinitely evil entity Jesus is saving us from again? Oh that’s right, Jesus himself.